Oldendorff Carriers GmbH and Co. KG v Tharmalingam

Oldendorff Carriers GmbH and Co. KG, a German shipping company, filed a claim against Tharmalingam, an Australian citizen, in the Federal Court of Australia. The dispute centred on the enforcement of an arbitral award made in Singapore, which the applicant sought to enforce in Australia. The main issues were the adoption of a referee's report concerning the assessment of damages and costs, and the calculation of pre-judgment interest on the awarded sum in United States dollars.

The court was required to decide whether it was appropriate to adopt the referee's assessment of damages and costs as submitted, without requiring further justification or evidence. Additionally, the court needed to determine the appropriate rate of pre-judgment interest applicable to the awarded sum denominated in United States dollars. The court considered the compensatory nature of pre-judgment interest and the purpose of such an award, as outlined in section 51A of the Federal Court of Australia Act 1976 (Cth).

In reaching its decision, the court found that the average differential calculated by Ms James was an appropriate figure to use when added to the official rate, to arrive at a compensatory rate of interest. The court was satisfied that this method would achieve a sum of pre-judgment interest that was compensatory and consistent with the purpose of such an award. Consequently, the court ordered that judgment be entered with the sum for pre-judgment interest of USD271,161.93, and otherwise gave effect to the referees' opinion in their report regarding the amounts of the judgment sum and costs.

The court made several orders, including that the respondents pay the applicant USD1,830,408.68 (inclusive of pre-judgment interest up to 28 November 2019 of USD271,161.93), pay the applicant's costs of AUD32,678, and that interest on the unpaid judgment sum accrue at the official maximum target interest rates set by the Federal Reserve Bank of New York plus 3.106% during any period it remains unpaid. The time in which the respondents may file a notice of appeal was extended to 28 days after the date of the judgment.